Ballerina wrote:
Then why is it that the majority of these killers choose to shoot themselves the minute armed personnel show up?

Because they really have no sense of life and death. So now they are either in search of the 72 virgins or they're thinking it's just like their favorite video game and there's a "start over" button at the end.

Tessablue wrote:Man, imagine what it must be like to hear about these incidents and think "Guns are good and I must defend them. We need more guns."

Yet another one of those shameful legacies my generation has to tear down and rebuild, I guess.

Let me ask you this. If someone approaches you aiming a gun at you, wouldn't you want to be carrying, as well. Sad to say - it wasn't always this way so it's the current generation that is causing the problem. It's now kill or be killed and until the good guys show the bad guys they are not going to get away with their ****, it's not going to change. Illinois has the strongest gun laws in the Union and the most crime. Texas has the most guns and the least crime.

I'm not sure where you got the stats that IL has the most crime and TX has the least. Here's the US News and World Reports list of safest states by violent crimes (and gun crimes are always violent) - https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... lic-safety. IL is actually rated as safer than TX (30th vs 35th for violent crimes).

Washington Post released a guide last year on gun regulation by state - https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... bd452a1fff. The states with the most restrictions are CT (which happened in response to Newtown), CA, MD, MA, NJ, and NY, plus DC. These are the only states that ban assault weapons, which is what most mass shootings use. An assault weapon is generally defined as "any semi-automatic weapon that includes features or attachments 'that appear useful in military and criminal applications but unnecessary in shooting sports or self-defense.'"

TX actually has more gun regulation laws than you might think - it bans high-risk individuals and those convicted of domestic violence. They have open carry laws that are more permissive than IL's, true, but IL's open carry license really isn't that difficult to get (my husband's family pretty much all live in IL and they're hunters).

So if you take the US News and World Reports list of safest states and superimpose the WaPo data regarding gun laws, here are the top 10 safest states and their gun laws:
1. Vermont - only bans individuals with domestic violence convictions. But we can all agree that VT attracts only peace loving hippies?
2. Maine - bans those with DV convictions and high-risk individuals.
3. Virginia - same as Maine
4. New Hampshire - same as Vermont
5. Idaho - no restrictions. But they have more cattle than people anyway.
6. Connecticut - bans assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, has universal background checks, and bans those with DV convictions and high-risk individuals.
7. Kentucky - prohibits high-risk individuals only
8. Wyoming - same as Kentucky
9. Utah - same as Maine
10. North Dakota - same as Kentucky

Here is my interpretation of those two lists - more permissive gun laws are correlated to higher violent crime rates, but more restrictive laws are not necessarily correlated with less violent crime. And actually, as I've gone through the WaPo guide, I'm not sure how much I like it because it doesn't address open-carry or any states that may allow guns on school grounds nor does it address loopholes like no need for background check if gun is bought at a gun show (which would explain why NV is so violent despite having a universal background check law - there are a lot of gun shows in NV). If anyone is interested, I can delve deeper into certain states' gun laws - part of my job is legal research, so I have access to a lot of resources.

As for cities, you're probably thinking of Chicago, which is rather notorious in the media for crime. However, it's not the most violent city in the US - according to Forbes, Detroit is, followed by St Louis, Oakland, Memphis, Birmingham, Atlanta, Baltimore, Stockton, Cleveland, and Buffalo. Chicago doesn't make their top 10 list. CBS News did a feature a little while back on the deadliest cities. The top 10 list is as follows:
1. St Louis
2. Baltimore
3. New Orleans
4. Detroit
5. Cleveland
6. Kansas City
7. Memphis
8. Chicago
9. Cincinnati
10. Las Vegas (the recent deadly mass shooting there is not included in these stats)

Tessablue wrote:Man, imagine what it must be like to hear about these incidents and think "Guns are good and I must defend them. We need more guns."

Yet another one of those shameful legacies my generation has to tear down and rebuild, I guess.

Let me ask you this. If someone approaches you aiming a gun at you, wouldn't you want to be carrying, as well. Sad to say - it wasn't always this way so it's the current generation that is causing the problem. It's now kill or be killed and until the good guys show the bad guys they are not going to get away with their ****, it's not going to change. Illinois has the strongest gun laws in the Union and the most crime. Texas has the most guns and the least crime.

If someone has a gun on you and you pull out a gun, you get shot. That's like, self defense 101.

And while I suppose it must be uncomfortable to acknowledge the inevitable destruction of your cultural ideology (I wouldn't know), I can't say that I understand the desire to literally make things up from thin air. Like, it's insanely easy to just google "crime rates by state" and... oh, starry did it already. Thanks starry, and also sorry you had to do that?

Anyways, there's literally nothing either of you can do to prevent your ideology from eventually being banished to the most shameful pages of the history books. A small solace in light of so many horrible, preventable tragedies... but a comforting inevitability nonetheless.

What makes me nuts is the assumption that, because I am for stricter gun control, I am anti-gun and am a liberal elitist who has never touched a gun. I am not anti-gun. I've gone shooting before, and my husband's family has guns. They hunt. I'm actually kind of bummed because my husband and BIL are shooting clay pigeons this weekend and I don't get to go because I have to watch our kid. I have no desire to go hunting but I don't have problems with other people hunting as long as they're doing it legally (and I think generally state hunting laws are decent).

What I do have a problem with are assault weapons that aren't used for hunting and that civilians have no reason to possess and high-capacity magazines. No one needs those things if you aren't military or law enforcement. I also have a problem with open carry. Sure, you consider yourself a good guy, but I don't know you - how do I know you're not gonna shoot me because you think I'm a bad guy? More importantly - how do I know that you actually know how to use that gun in high stress situations? The military and law enforcement are trained extensively for those situations. The average civilian is not and there's no way for everyone around to know if you are not an average civilian.

starrydreamer wrote:I'm not sure where you got the stats that IL has the most crime and TX has the least. Here's the US News and World Reports list of safest states by violent crimes (and gun crimes are always violent) - https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... lic-safety. IL is actually rated as safer than TX (30th vs 35th for violent crimes).

If you read it correctly, Illinois is higher than TEXAS in violent crime

starrydreamer wrote:Washington Post released a guide last year on gun regulation by state - https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... bd452a1fff. The states with the most restrictions are CT (which happened in response to Newtown), CA, MD, MA, NJ, and NY, plus DC. These are the only states that ban assault weapons, which is what most mass shootings use. An assault weapon is generally defined as "any semi-automatic weapon that includes features or attachments 'that appear useful in military and criminal applications but unnecessary in shooting sports or self-defense.'" )

Hand guns, other than revolvers, are semi-automatic.

starrydreamer wrote:As for cities, you're probably thinking of Chicago, which is rather notorious in the media for crime. However, it's not the most violent city in the US - according to Forbes, Detroit is, followed by St Louis, Oakland, Memphis, Birmingham, Atlanta, Baltimore, Stockton, Cleveland, and Buffalo. Chicago doesn't make their top 10 list. CBS News did a feature a little while back on the deadliest cities. The top 10 list is as follows:
1. St Louis
2. Baltimore
3. New Orleans
4. Detroit
5. Cleveland
6. Kansas City
7. Memphis8. Chicago
9. Cincinnati
10. Las Vegas (the recent deadly mass shooting there is not included in these stats)

I guess it depends on what list you want to believe. Forbes or CBS News. I don't see any cities in Texas on either list.

God forbid anyone is ever caught in a situation where there is a shooter. You'll bless the man or woman who takes that person down with a legally owned weapon used by someone who knows what they're doing. Not everyone should carry a gun if you're afraid to use it or more importantly don't now how to use it.

But, frankly, I'm sick and tired of hearing that it's my generation that has caused the problems of rampant violence in this country and the current generation is going to fix it. HAH and double HAH. So long as sanctuary cities and illegal immigration is embraced by the left, the current generation is not going to solve a thing - especially if they keep voting such ilk back into office.

I've been in an active shooter situation. I was with a friend who is an immigrant (foreign concept, I know), and she was less disturbed by the experience and more upset by the fact that we all immediately knew what it meant and what to do when we saw people running past us. See, in most countries kids aren't raised to think about or fear being slaughtered in public, because it doesn't happen. It doesn't have to happen here, either, but it will keep happening until your incomprehensibly vicious, fearmongering, nihilistic ideology is ground into dust. And if my generation doesn't do it, the next one will. Your lot might keep trying, but you can't kill all of us.

Tessablue wrote:I've been in an active shooter situation. I was with a friend who is an immigrant (foreign concept, I know), and she was less disturbed by the experience and more upset by the fact that we all immediately knew what it meant and what to do when we saw people running past us. See, in most countries kids aren't raised to think about or fear being slaughtered in public, because it doesn't happen. It doesn't have to happen here, either, but it will keep happening until your incomprehensibly vicious, fearmongering, nihilistic ideology is ground into dust. And if my generation doesn't do it, the next one will. Your lot might keep trying, but you can't kill all of us.

Just curious - what lot are you referring to?!~ If you mean me (my lot), I can't imagine how much more obtuse you can get.

Good letter making its rounds on social media. LOTS OF FOOD FOR THOUGHT

An Open Letter to Senator Murphy on Gun Violence in America

Senator Murphy,

I was on a conference call for work today when my boss, who lives in Parkland, FL said "There's a been a shooting at my kids' school, I need to go." Thank God, a few minutes later he learned both of his daughters were safe.

I've already seen several posts on social media by people referencing your comments today. They are understandably upset and angry that this continues to happen in our country. The frustration and anger we all feel are well placed. No family should have to endure the pain of losing a loved one to senseless violence, especially a child who should be safe at their desk in school. I agree with these people wholeheartedly. Now is the time to have a serious conversation about gun violence in this country.

But what does that conversation entail? Many seem to believe it starts and ends with gun control. It includes much more.

Let's talk about gun control, yes. Let's talk about limiting the sale of excessively large magazines for rifles and armor-piercing bullets. Let's talk about back door sales of firearms at gun shows.

But let's not stop there.

Let's talk about the entertainment we consume. About the unhealthy obsession of watching horrific acts of torture and murder in horror films.

Let's talk about the games we allow and teach our children to play, with their assassinations and the rape and murder of prostitutes in the city park, before killing police officers for fun.

Let's talk about the moral relativism our society has embraced. The retreat from teaching moral absolutes. The refusal to recognize the value of human life as an objective truth that is always worth protecting.

Let's talk about the removal of any type of conversation on values from our schools lest someone be offended.

Let's talk about mental illness in all its ugliness and the sad reality of those left to live on the edges of society, many times in encampments on our streets.

Let's talk about the inability of many parents to parent. Their refusal to have real conversations with their children or to even pay attention to them at all.

Let's continue to pretend that minors shouldn't have supervision in their digital activities, that somehow the right to privacy of a 12-year-old supersedes any obligation to parent and guide their values and formation.

Let's talk about our obsession with our devices and our "stuff".
About our increasing inability to form interpersonal connections with people that may actually allow us to see when people are hurting, distressed, and troubled so that we can have these types of conversations before 16 kids in Florida lose their lives.

Any "real" conversation on gun violence includes all of these things. All of our "sacred cows" need to be on the table if we want to solve this problem.

If any of these topics above have us digging in our heels and making excuses, then we're not ready. If we're not able to be uncomfortable, then the conversation can't happen.

Solving the issue of gun violence in America will mean that we all may have to sacrifice something or change the way we approach our families, friends, children and even strangers. How many are willing to give up something comfortable to get the desired result?

Let's have the real conversations.

Otherwise, we'll just use the deaths of 16 children as a selfish device to further entrench ourselves on two sides of the gun control issue.

We may even pass more gun laws, perhaps even naming one after the victims, all the while never addressing the real problems that cause someone to actually take another person's life in the first place.

Tessablue wrote:I've been in an active shooter situation. I was with a friend who is an immigrant (foreign concept, I know), and she was less disturbed by the experience and more upset by the fact that we all immediately knew what it meant and what to do when we saw people running past us. See, in most countries kids aren't raised to think about or fear being slaughtered in public, because it doesn't happen. It doesn't have to happen here, either, but it will keep happening until your incomprehensibly vicious, fearmongering, nihilistic ideology is ground into dust. And if my generation doesn't do it, the next one will. Your lot might keep trying, but you can't kill all of us.

Just curious - what lot are you referring to?!~ If you mean me (my lot), I can't imagine how much more obtuse you can get.

Every single person who pushes back against change, who pretends nothing can be done, who feels that utterly inexplicable urge to go online and defend the guns every time something like this happens. The lot who somehow truly believe that this is all worth it.

Tessablue wrote:Every single person who pushes back against change, who pretends nothing can be done, who feels that utterly inexplicable urge to go online and defend the guns every time something like this happens. The lot who somehow truly believe that this is all worth it.

I'll defend any law abiding citizen who legally owns a gun, and I'll fight any legislation that wants to take that right away from us. Did you read the letter I posted above? It pretty much echoes EXACTLY where I stand on the gun control issue. The issue goes far deeper than just gun control. Most of correcting the issues pointed out in this letter left to parents. In the meantime, I'll do what I have to do to protect myself from the current generation (not just here in the USA) who may wish to do me harm. If that is contrary to your way of thinking, then the problem is yours - not mine.

I don't care what your stance is and I don't care about that pathetic excuse-making letter. It's not a complicated issue anywhere else. I'm just exhausted and sick of all of this and I want you and people like you to know that it isn't going to last no matter what you do. All these arguments? All that fear you desperately cling to? It's not just pointless- it'll be a source of scorn and derision for generations, until it's finally forgotten. That's your legacy! If you're okay with it, then I can't stop you. I'm not interested in stopping you. I just want to make sure you know.

Tessablue wrote:I don't care what your stance is and I don't care about that pathetic excuse-making letter. It's not a complicated issue anywhere else. I'm just exhausted and sick of all of this and I want you and people like you to know that it isn't going to last no matter what you do. All these arguments? All that fear you desperately cling to? It's not just pointless- it'll be a source of scorn and derision for generations, until it's finally forgotten. That's your legacy! If you're okay with it, then I can't stop you. I'm not interested in stopping you. I just want to make sure you know.

Guess what? I know, and like you I don't care what you think because you basically don't get it. You're like a terrier with a bone that will ankle bit anyone who interferes with your train of thought which regrettably doesn't have a caboose. How you can discount the words in that man's letter indicates you're not open to debate - your way or the highway. Have at it and see where it gets you.

starrydreamer wrote:I'm not sure where you got the stats that IL has the most crime and TX has the least. Here's the US News and World Reports list of safest states by violent crimes (and gun crimes are always violent) - https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... lic-safety. IL is actually rated as safer than TX (30th vs 35th for violent crimes).

If you read it correctly, Illinois is higher than TEXAS in violent crime

Actually, no. It's a public safety list, so the less violent crime, the higher you are on the list. VT has the least violent crime, which is why it is ranked highest at 1. IL is 30th, TX is 35th.

Guess what? I'm pretty sure we had this exact same argument maybe twelve years ago, only it was about gay marriage instead. I was right then, I'm right now, you probably know it on some level but I don't particularly care either way. I'm happy to be entrenched on team "people shouldn't be able to slaughter kids with weapons of war." It is, without a doubt, the winning one.

Tessablue wrote:See, in most countries kids aren't raised to think about or fear being slaughtered in public, because it doesn't happen.

Really? You might want to look at the stats as to how many other countries have experienced school shooting. From 1927 to present, school shooting deaths in the USA is 292. Compare that to what goes on in some other countries in more recent years.